What would you consider public funding of transgender care?

Post Reply New Topic

People can't look at themselves in a mirror to figure out what is going on down there?

Gender Confusion form what I hear, is supposed to be when a person thinks they are a gender they are physically not, and causes them to look at themselves in disgust and leads to depression. It is probably a legit psychological disorder as well.

I think the surgery should be privately financed, or paid for by insurance that chooses to cover it. It's very expensive and it's not directly life saving. I say that because "If I don't get this I'll commit suicide" is a psychiatric issue and not a med/surg one like a ruptured spleen or an internal bleed or a tumor. Not having surgery won't directly shorten anyone's life, although their actions from not having it may. It's the same with people also are truly hideously deformed. They may be so depressed over being stuck in a body that doesn't represent who they are that they want to kill themselves or just drink themselves to death if they can't have it fixed. That being said, I do have empathy for both and would like to see them get the surgery that would make them feel better about themselves and be who they are. The problem is, we have people going around with untreated med/surg conditions who can't get access to medical care and those conditions will directly kill them if they aren't treated. We need to be able to treat those who will die from the condition without treatment before we treat those who may die from their actions because of the condition without treatment, first.

I do think there needs to be insurance that will cover it though. Who would underwrite it, and where it would be available and how much it would cost are completely beyond me. I'm no expert in insurance, but I'm sure somebody could think of a way.

As for post surgical trans folks, I think that they should have access to hormones and other meds because it's needed because of the surgery. Not only are they needed to keep the person looking the way they do from the surgery, but hormones can cause severe psychiatric problems if they are discontinued so it becomes a medical problem. The hormones will prevent them from having an organic psychiatric problem, which again, is medical.

I don't think something like Medicaid should pay for the surgery because there are lots of medically needed life saving surgeries and treatments that Medicaid already doesn't pay for, and these are things that will directly kill someone if not obtained.

Also, there are so many inunsured adults out there, even with Obamacare available and unaffordable to many, there are people going around with untreated and untreatable conditions that will kill them. Because they can't afford the treatment and don't qualify for Medicaid because they do have some income. I have major depression from time to time and I can't afford the medicine for it nor to go to the doctor. I'm at a very high risk of suicide but I can't see anyone and get the meds I need, which are much much cheaper than a sex change operation. My husband has high blood pressure and high cholesterol and he can't even afford a doctor visit, the lab work and the meds. That will kill him eventually the longer it's left untreated. I know someone with no insurance who has diabetes but cannot get it treated because he can't afford the doctor and meds. Or insurance. Those are the kinds of things that public funds should pay for first. Not my depression because if I die from it, that's my actions not the disease, but my husbands problems, my friends problems. Other peoples problems that will kill them and are killing them with no help from them in doing so, those need to be funded to be treated before we start funding treatments that will help people not commit suicide, like sex change operations and even my own depression.

Do you see the difference in the two? While yes, your problem is a medical problem in the books, as is mine. But death does not occur directly from the disorder itself, it occurs from the actions that the patient takes because of it. Diseases that kill should be treated before diseases that can cause us to kill ourselves. We do have some control over that, even though it's not much. But those who have diseases that will kill them, have no control over anything. They are helpless in the face of what is effecting their body.

Yes, I know you want your surgery. I'd love to see you get your surgery. I'd even help you with fund raising to pay for your surgery if you could think of a way to do it. But public money belongs to the public collective, and the money for health needs to be spent on what is actually killing people before we spend it on what might cause someone to kill themself. My depression included.

It's terribly interesting that you mention me here even though I explicitly stated that I didn't know enough about the disorder that walrus mentioned. From what I know I am not yet convinced that it is medically necessary. That doesn't mean much of anything however, all I have is Socratic ignorance (which is when you know enough to know that you don't know).

I just noticed that the OP's poll pre-empted the inevitable stream of ideological platitudes .

Why do people think that every point of government funding should require their approval? The funding of things you don't agree with is a by-product of living in a democracy with people who aren't exactly you; to paraphrase Jon Stewart.

Last edited by Stannis on 04 Apr 2014, 10:33 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Just to point out ...

1. U.S. Medicare pays at least 80% of the cost for "scooters" and "lifts" for immobile people, and so I dismiss the argument that "medical necessity" must be one that causes death if not treated.

2. I fail to understand a rationalization that a human mobility device merits coverage, however, the dreadful state of being transgender does not.

3. I dismiss any argument that says the U.S. "cannot afford it", or "does not have enough money", or "service have to be prioritized", because the U.S. has been on a long term spending binge, and the entire cost of trans care is trivial.

I'm against the public funding of Rascal scooters for fat people as well, unless we're talking about a genuine need (eg. having cerebral palsy or being paralyzed from below the waist).

The Rascal Scooter (or, more precisely, a mobility scooter) is one of the most celebrated inventions for increasing happiness in people immobilized due to physical incapability or age, as they are given the opportunity to be self-reliant and be part of the community.

It is also one of the cheapest ways to increase such happiness.

A person genuinely concerned about the well-being of his/her fellow humans would consider public funding of such scooters a high priority. Especially if they were living in a filthy rich country like Norway.

My brother in law has a scooter,he has a back injury from an accident.He uses the scooter to chase his wife around the house,it makes him a happy man.And she likes it also.

Scooters allow the person to take normal day to day care of themselves and not be chairbound. My mother had one after surgery. She could go in the kitchen and get breakfast. She could go to the bathroom. She could go get water to take her meds. She could go to the bedroom to get in bed. She could not walk. A scooter was cheaper than a round the clock aide to stay there and help her do those things. Without the scooter or someone to help her, she wouldn't have survived. She wouldn't have gotten food, medicine, been able to go to the bathroom or go to bed. Yes, many people use them to go out. Thats simply a perk of them. You can go to the grocery store or to church or to the drug store or doctor in one, in this town. But they are basically made to get around your own home, and are for people who aren't strong enough to turn the wheels in a regular wheelchair.

They are still far less than a sex change operation. And they are far less than what my ongoing depression treatment would be. BDD is considered psychiatric, from what I've seen, and other than violent psychiatric disorders, most of them take a back seat to med/surg disorders and diseases. Someone mentioned broken legs not killing you, but they actually can. Fatty embolus can migrate and cause brain damage and death from bone. Infected teeth can cause endocarditis and kill you. Lots of things that seem simple can turn deadly in a matter of weeks or months. All by themselves, even in a mentally healthy person who is happy with themsef and wants to live.

I do think that the trans community should some way or other find a way to raise funds, to underwrite insurance that would cover it, to be proactive and find ways to cover the surgery that their community needs to live a happy life. However, we have to address the things that cause death, in and of themselves, before we address things that have suicide as a by product of them.

Seriously self defeating arguement here.

You trivize immobility as a problem.

Immobility is far more 'dreadful' than being an able bodied person with gender dysphoria.

So ofcourse it deserves coverage when a sex change operation does not.

So if you argue that way- folks will 'dismiss' YOU.

Yup, it is a piss poor argument. I know better arguments, but I am not in the mood to share them. If GGPViper wishes to take on that responsibility, he may. He has put forth very good arguments regarding cost in the past.

But if nobody posts any better arguments, then it's like they don't even exist, and the opponents win. Am I right?

Another question one might ask is, should the government fund mental health programs at all? After all, depression isn't exactly fatal. Autism is not inherently life threatening. Bipolar disorder won't kill you.

So, should taxpayers money be spent on such treatment?

Like I said: Genuine need. If you're 500 lbs and too lazy to walk, it would be better if the welfare system bought you a gym membership instead. If you (on the other hand) have Cerebral palsy, there's nothing else you can do to increase your mobility--which makes it something the welfare state should pay for.

Norway is up to it's neck in external debt, there's a lot of hidden unemployment--and if we use the oil money to fund scooters for fat people, there won't be anything left to retirement pensions for future generations. Secondly, the GDP of Norway does not mean that the government has a lot of liquid assets. Lastly, a lot of the government's money goes to waste because of mismanagement (which is why the household income of people in Norway is no different than that of Germany, Great Britain or for that matter Sweden, if adjusted for the prices).

Last edited by Kurgan on 05 Apr 2014, 1:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Asperger's syndrome, depression, and bipolar disorder does not grant you disability benefits just like that in any country that I know of.

That was not the question that I posed. I will ask it again - should taxpayer money be used to fund mental health programs, within the existing state healthcare systems?